Senate Republicans are signaling their dismay over President Trump’s provocative decision to advance a $5 billion “pocket rescission,” which is becoming a major obstacle to establishing a bipartisan spending deal to avoid a government shutdown at the end of this month.
Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) expressed his concern that the pocket rescission will give Democrats a reason to oppose funding legislation, putting Washington in danger of blundering into a government shutdown after Sept. 30.
“Anything that gives our Democrat colleagues a reason not to do the bipartisan appropriations process is not a good thing. If they can use that as an excuse, that causes us a problem,” he warned.
“I do not think this is a good idea and I think it’s going to give our Democratic colleagues a reason not to work with us on an appropriations process,” he said
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), a senior member of the Appropriations Committee, on Tuesday came out “strongly” against Trump’s move to sidestep Congress and claw back funding without a vote, calling it “unlawful.”
“Congress alone bears the constitutional responsibility for funding our government, and any effort to claw back resources outside of the appropriations process undermines that responsibility,” she said in a statement posted on social media.
She warned the “unilateral actions” by Trump’s Office of Management and Budget “risk throwing the entire process into chaos.”
Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), another senior member of the Appropriations Committee, said she doesn’t know whether Trump’s pocket rescission is lawful or not but urged the White House to let Congress handle funding clawbacks, something it does routinely.
“I think we need to appropriate and the appropriations process needs to be adhered to and strengthened, which we’re trying to do,” she said.
“I don’t know if it’s legal or illegal, I think that’s going to have to be settled by the court,” she said.
She noted that lawmakers “do rescissions in our appropriations bills all the time.”
“So the appropriations route is my preferable route,” she said.
Senate Appropriations Committee Chair Susan Collins (R-Maine) last week expressed her strong displeasure with the White House’s decision to advance a pocket rescission.
“Any effort to rescind appropriated funds without congressional approval is a clear violation of the law,” she said.
Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) said he’s worried about the “separation” of powers between the executive and legislative branches, with the president moving to seize funding already appropriated by Congress and doing it so soon before the end of the fiscal year that senators have little chance to respond.
“Do I worry about the separation issue? Sure I do. I think that Congress has every right to defend its Article I role,” he said. “At the same time we have a powerful presidency.”
The North Dakota Republican questioned whether it’s a worthwhile expenditure of Trump’s political capital to pick a fight with Congress.
“The political capital expended by on some causes is not worth” the potential victory, he said. “I’m just not sure it’s worth it.”
Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) said Tuesday that while Republican senators might support Trump’s proposal to cut $5 billion in funding from the State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development, which Trump dismantled, he indicated that Republicans are not thrilled with the process of a pocket rescission.
Thune said Republican lawmakers should be able to enact spending cuts through the regular appropriations process, something he’s tried to get back on track after years of Congress resorting to massive year-end omnibus packages to get its work done.
“Looking at the composition of the rescissions, I think there are things for the most part that a lot of people would agree with. … But as a matter of process, I think it’s the right thing to have the appropriations process do their work,” he said, revealing that he agrees with fellow Republican senators who say that Congress, not solely the executive branch, should handle funding reductions and rescissions.
“That’s why we tried to move bills on the floor. We’ll try and move some more before the end of the fiscal year and do everything we can to avoid a government shutdown,” he said.
The Senate this summer, before it left for a four-week August recess, passed three appropriations bills funding military construction and veterans’ affairs, agriculture and the legislative branch.
Thune on Tuesday revealed that he plans to move additional spending bills before the end of the month and told reporters he doesn’t plan to negotiate a spending deal with Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (N.Y.) behind closed doors — something that was a regular practice in past Congresses.
Schumer and House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries (N.Y.) have asked Thune and Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) to participate in a “four corners” negotiation between the top leadership members of both chambers to reach a spending deal.
Thune has a different plan: Let the spending bills work their way through the Senate and House Appropriations committees and onto the floor without backroom dealmaking.
“We’re committed to a bipartisan process to fund the government. Chuck’s used to writing these bills behind closed doors in his office, that’s the way it’s been done when he ran the Senate. We’re running the Senate differently,” he said. “We want this to be in the light of day. We think these debates ought to be on the floor in public.”
Jeffries told reporters earlier Tuesday that House Democrats will vote against funding bills if they’re not included in the process of drafting them.
“We will not support a partisan spending bill put forward by Republicans that hurts everyday Americans,” he said
Jeffries said he communicated that message directly to the Speaker last week.
The Democratic leader said he told Johnson he wants to “find common ground where possible” but “also made clear we’re not going to support partisan funding legislation. Period. Full stop.”
Schumer warned in a “Dear Colleague” letter Tuesday of the growing chance of a government shutdown in part because of Trump’s bid to claw back funding without congressional approval.
“As we near the funding deadline, Republicans are once again threatening to go-at-it-alone — heading our country towards a shutdown,” he wrote.
“With the Trump administration’s attempt of the so-called ‘pocket rescission,’ it is clear that Republicans are prioritizing chaos over governing, partisanship over partnership,” Schumer said.
Sen. Chuck Grassley (Iowa), the most senior Senate Republican, argued that President Jimmy Carter proposed rescissions in July of 1977, which some Republicans now argue was an attempt at a pocket rescission.
Grassley said the issue has become muddled because the Government Accountability Office ruled in 1977 that a pocket rescission was legal but has since changed its view of the matter.
“All I can tell you is in 1977 Carter did it and he did it on the advice of the GAO recommendation and since then GAO has changed their mind, so I guess it’s all up in the air,” he said when asked about Trump’s proposed pocket rescission.
Sen. Dick Durbin (Ill.), a senior Democrat on the Appropriations Committee, warned the proposed “pocket rescission” would serve as a major obstacle to getting Democratic votes for a deal to avoid a government shutdown.
He said if Republicans don’t provide a commitment on rejecting a pocket rescission, “they’re not respecting the appropriations process.”
He urged Republican colleagues to join with Democrats to beat back the president’s proposal.
“If we’re going to respect the appropriations process, then the Congress has to hang together to enforce it. And that means when the president goes too far, we got to say no,” he said.
